Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free: AG Photographic The Imaging Warehouse Process Supplies RH Designs Second-hand Darkroom Supplies |
> Fooled by a negative |
*** Click here for the FADU 2015/2014 Yearbooks *** |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
||||
|
||||
Fooled by a negative
I've just posted my latest print exchange print.
During the session in which I made it I also spent some time working on a different negative. That was a small still life, of a backlit glass vase holding a sprig of Gypsophila. The negative is 10x8, processed in PMK and to my eyes looks beautiful. I've previously attempted the same negative and on both occasions the results have been utterly disappointing. Just nothing. It isn't the first time I've experienced this. Viewed as a negative the image seems balanced and tonally rich. Printed as a positive it suddenly becomes dull. I find myself wondering if the negative seems more interesting because it's not how we actually see the world. Does reversing the tones add mystery? Or, as someone who loves warm-tone prints does the stained negative seduce me excessively because of its colour? Does anyone else find they have negatives they completely mis-read, where the negative is far more interesting than the actual print? Or do I need new glasses? |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
I must admit, I find negatives really hard to read.
The few negatives that look perfect to my eye, more often than not, print easily and beautifully. Although for most of my neg's, I really have little clue and need to rely on my contact prints to tell me whether it's worth putting time, money and effort into making a print. And even then, the enlargement doesn't always go my way!
__________________
MartyNL “Reaching a creative state of mind thru positive action is considered preferable to waiting for inspiration.” - Minor White, 1950 |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Let me put it another way, I don't think I've ever had a poor contact print make anything other than a poor enlarged print.
So no, I don't try and have given up all hope on ever trying to read a negative.
__________________
MartyNL “Reaching a creative state of mind thru positive action is considered preferable to waiting for inspiration.” - Minor White, 1950 |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
I've never had much ability to read a negative.
The ones I've thought looked interesting rarely prove to be so and others that look rather dull can be full of tonality. So, I've stopped bothering and now just contact print everything and use contact print to guide me. I'm sure there are some people who can really read them but I'm not sure how. May be professional printers like Robin Bell - where it will save him lots of time and money can gain an advantage from really being able to read negatives. Martin |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Reading a negative
I think for most folk it would be difficult to read a negative unless they use a standardised light source. I can get quite a reasonable idea by looking at the negatives with the aid of a flatbed transparency viewer with a daylight fluorescent tubes.
B&W I find are relatively easy. With colour, the shadows can be too thin to judge just by looking at them because of the orange mask. They will print OK with seemingly little to actually see. I can get a better idea by scanning them and checking the screen. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Reading negatives is a difficult job, at least to me it is!
I haven't got an enormous amount of experience yet as I've only had my darkroom for a little over 18 months now. Before that I only scanned my negatives and that was it. Now I still scan my negatives first and let the digital files guide me in which of them I want to print. Sometimes I also edit them digitally first, to get an idea of how I would want to process the negative in the enlarger. I do start to recognize the excessively bad or difficult ones with my bare eyes though. About the added mistery... Could it be that it's the transparency of the negative what gives it this little "extra"? Almost like the magic of slides? Somewhat related to this, I regularly struggle to get a print just as sparkling as the digital scan looked, changing exposure times and increasing the contrast filter more and more before I eventually still end up with a so-so print. I still write this down mostly to my lack of experience, but probably in some cases there's just not more to be had from a specific negative, regardless of what one does. |
Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free: AG Photographic The Imaging Warehouse Process Supplies RH Designs Second-hand Darkroom Supplies |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DIY 110 Negative Bags. | Nat Polton | Equipment miscellaneous | 1 | 23rd October 2020 11:44 AM |
Calibration negative ? | Alan Sleator | Darkroom | 32 | 5th November 2019 09:40 PM |
Negative Scanners | Quendil | Equipment miscellaneous | 2 | 10th August 2018 04:03 PM |
How do you crop a negative? | gsingh | Photography in general | 11 | 12th February 2015 11:06 AM |
Negative carrier | PeterMcC | Darkroom | 11 | 23rd August 2011 10:01 PM |